blueloosh

History

Recent Comments

This is the best perspective on Michigan football I’ve read in weeks. Absolutely correct.

Outsidethebox, no one denies some schedules are more demanding than others. The point is that we can and should be able to develop a team that can beat anyone and contend for it all. The 1997 schedule was a gauntlet; it felt like a breeze. The question is, are we getting to the level of our 1997 and 2016 (it’s true) teams that could have beat anyone, including in a playoff. Last year the answer was no way—but the key thing wasn’t the numerical W/L outcome, it was the level of play and trajectory of personnel.

Peters, obviously. But my personal runner-up is Ben Mason. The man is a persistent road-grader. with good instincts. Roll through Higdon's 10-yd touchdown on slow-mo and behold the glory that is Mason. Similar, not-quite-as-glorious blocking on Walker's touchdown. And other plays I can't recall off the top of my head. We have other great FBs this year, but this kid is a delight. We are going to have a ball watching him for another 3.5 years.

The ruling of a completed pass at the 7:00 mark in the '85 Minnesota game is pretty hilarious to watch now that it can be considered alongside the Calvin Johnson incompletion where he did not complete the act (or whatever the phrase is).

We were not going to win last night's game. MSU is a strong team that had been waiting all year to put (more hyped) UM in its place. They had a soft three games in February before us to gear up (only decent challenge was a road game at crumbling Minnesota). We had a late night prize fight in Bloomington, a roller coaster overtime game against OSU, and a gut-wrenching overtime loss at Wisconsin. We were on fumes. They were lying in wait. We got crushed.

I was so certain of the result this was the one game all year I taped but did not watch the same night. Glad I did not, I might be in meltdown mode like everyone else.

Cool reason does not suggest time for panic. We lost three games on the home courts of three teams in the KenPom top 13. That is disappointing, but not unexpected in college basketball. We are still #5 in KenPom after last night's game. We have a favorable slate going forward.

It's all about the tournament and we have the talent to play with anybody. The key is having our confidence at a crescendo when the tournament starts. In that, the recent schedule may actually be a blessing.

Dave Brandon is an AD who understands that his role is to make the university money

If that's your view, I can see why you like Brandon. I disagree completely with the role of the AD. I think it is to achieve success as measured by: (1) on-field performance and (2) school reputation. We play sports because it brings the community together, makes alumni proud (and more apt to donate through means other than buying yet another random new jersey), and gives Michigan great exposure. I have made judgments about countless other schools based on the way they conduct themselves in the world of collegiate sports. Wisconsin sports improve my opinion of Wisconsin the school. Ditto Duke, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Georgia Tech. I have the opposite opinion for many others--e.g. Ohio State, Miami U. Those are both pretty good schools but it's hard for me to regard them that way because of the image they project through sports.

Would you really put money ahead of on-field success and school reputation? Admittedly, all three can work in cooperation and reinforce one another, but money has to be third. And there are many instances where making more money is detrimental to on-field success (e.g. giving students far-away seats) or image (see everything Brian hates).

You can walk without assistance after a concussion. And Gholston was not quick to get up. He took a nap with his arms attached to his body like limp noodles. Hope the kid is ok, but I mostly agree with the OP. You don't throw someone back onto the field after short term paralysis because they can recite the score to you.

If you're trying to deflect attention from a pedophilia scandal, I don't see how publicly issuing a hard-hitting report on another institution helps the cause. If anything, it gives victims more confidence to speak up and brings the issue more into the public consciousness so people wonder 'where else is this happening?'

There is another live sports fan familiar with this classic question and its use as a reference point. Apparently no one at ESPN (where I first read the story) has heard of "have you stopped beating your wife" before.

You have already done well for yourself. I will be very candid because this is a huge decision.

Do not go to law school unless you are sure you want to be a lawyer. The schools you are looking at will not put you on a path to riches. (To be clear: the sky is the limit for what you can accomplish after school, wherever you go--but it will have to be your own hustle, it will not be there for you just because you're holding a degree from Wisconsin, Kent, etc.)

If you are certain your want to be lawyer, and certain you want to practice in Michigan, it is probably not worth leaving the state, even if you could get in to Wisconsin or Iowa.

If you are looking to move to a large city in another region of the country go to the school with the best national reputation among your options (i.e. Iowa or Wisconsin).

I graduated from Michigan and work at a firm in DC. To be very candid, if I had a relative or close friend considering law school I would not suggest it unless (1) you can go to a top 15 school or (2) want to practice local criminal/family law. And let me be clear that local law practice can be a great life. Fine pay and much more fun/entertaining than what I am doing. But make sure that's what you're after.

% of International students and faculty -- this does seem important to me...if you're trying to boost the standing of schools from a small country closely connected to several other small, nearby countries (i.e. the UK)

Like I said, no complaint with the results, but if you look at the methodology and the scores they came up with...doesn't make a lot of sense.

I think they both serve a useful purpose. The board "hello" post is instantaneous news. The main page "hello" post is shortly-after-the-fact news with substantive commentary and analysis. I don't mind knowing the news right away. And the "hello" is something I will admit I scan for on the board post titles.

I noticed that and I love it. I don't see "Ohio" as disrespectful. It is just a more efficient way of referring to the school, since there is no confusion about whether our coaches mean Ohio State or Ohio U. I think more than anything it shows familiarity with OSU, almost like being on a first-name basis. It is totally different from something stupid like "that school down south."

I confess, I am a little taken aback by the hysterical and persistent it wasn't the tweets! movement. I understand that Michigan fans are supposed to hate the author of the Yuri Wright twitter article. That's fine. I agree to hate that guy. But I think it's silly for us to bend over backwards to ignore any evidence that the tweets might have mattered to someone. You say the tweets were a reason he was dismissed but not the only reason. I believe that. But I think being a full IWTT truther (denying that even his hs cared) is a bridge too far.

"He was expelled from the school for the things he had written on Twitter," Toal told ESPNNewYork.com. "It was pretty simple really, what he wrote were some graphic sex things. This is a Catholic school, things like that cannot happen. It was totally inappropriate."

Why is it highly doubtful that the tweets were areason Wright was dropped? We know the UM coaches are aware of twitter. You don't think it's possible one of the dozens of people working for Michigan's athletic department or football program noticed some of the tweets? It is amazing to me how many people are buying the Tom Beaver explanation that Michigan dropped him because of character but absolutely not because of the tweets (which evidenced questionable character). No Michigan coach is going to "corroborate" the story and say: "yes, I can confirm that it was the tweets, specifically the ones about..." What you ask for is absurd. They are not going to do that. They are going to vaguely cite character and move on.